The following exchange between former New Jersey governors Brendan T. Byrne and Tom Kean took place in a Wednesday-morning teleconference.

Q: Both parties now seem to agree New Jersey needs pension reform. But is Senate President Stephen Sweeney trying to undercut Gov. Chris Christie by introducing his own pension reform plan ahead of the governor?

BYRNE: This is what government is all about. Everybody makes proposals and, out of that, we cull the best of them.

KEAN: This is going to be an in-depth discussion and it ought to be. We have to get this right. We need a fair pension plan that people can afford — and one that isn’t that much better than what the average person in New Jersey has. That’s going to take a while, and we need to put our best input into the process.

BYRNE: We need to see that we don’t have enough money and we don’t want to raise taxes. That means eliminating a lot of things that are nice, but not essential. If that’s the standard, we have to make some tough choices.

KEAN: We have to be fair to public workers. We want them to have decent pensions and health care, but not through programs that are so rich they become unaffordable for the taxpayer.

BYRNE: We’ve been kidding ourselves up to now, and now we’re going to see some of the consequences. Personally, I’m sorry to see more potholes.

Q: Is there a danger that increasing employees’ pension contributions could mean some workers will need more social services or retirement care assistance?

KEAN: I don’t see why that would be true for state employees more than for anybody else. Public workers in New Jersey get health care and pensions and, like all other workers, have to plan ahead to make sure they are adequate for their retirement.

BYRNE: Remember, in sixth grade, we learned that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Q: Some economists and commentators now say we won’t get back to fiscal health until we address other entitlements as well, on the state and national level. Do you see either party wanting to be the first to do that?

BYRNE: Clearly, no. But I’m starting to see some understanding of the problem, and understanding gives us a better chance of solving it.

KEAN: And we’ve got to educate people. A national poll shows people understand we’ve got to cut the federal deficit. But the same poll shows that over 80 percent of people say don’t touch Social Security, or Medicare or Medicaid. That’s unrealistic. That’s most of the deficit. But those polls scare elected officials, including the president. He hasn’t even endorsed his own commission’s recommendations. And yet, to continue the programs as they exist is unsustainable. Sooner or later, that continued inaction will lower the standard of living for the average American.

Q: Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank Lautenberg have proposed a new Hudson River tunnel plan that Christie seems to feel could be viable. But are we in an era when we simply can’t afford big public works projects?

BYRNE: We’re in an era where we can’t even move in this state. Roads are overcrowded, transportation systems are overburdened. This problem has to be solved.

KEAN: The president has said his budget is going to include big rail transportation projects, and that’s what this is. If the federal government is willing to pick up most of the cost, and New Jersey and New York share in the rest and won’t be liable for cost overruns, then the project becomes possible.

BYRNE: I’ve always said if we ran trains every 20 minutes until midnight, it would get a lot of people out of their cars immediately. The argument is there aren’t enough people to fill trains up to midnight, but you can get people into public transportation just by knowing they can get a train at 11 at night. When Ruthi and I drive to New York, we budget two hours for what is a half-hour trip, so it’s possible.

KEAN: We’ve subsidized roads very heavily in this country. If we gave the same subsidy to mass transit, roads would be less traveled. That includes additional buses, as well as additional trains, and tracks that go to places they don’t go now. This is long-range planning. How much of that we can do in this economy is the question.

Q: With so much of our state and national political discussion now focused on finances, are we at risk of taking our eyes off issues like homeland security or foreign policy?

BYRNE: I don’t think so. I think homeland security and foreign policy are being paid great attention by the decision makers.

KEAN: We’re paying attention. But even these important questions have to go into the budget thinking. In this time of unrest in the Middle East, we have to continue foreign aid, but how much should be a matter of debate. Homeland security is vital for our protection, but that doesn’t mean we can waste money — and I think there has been money wasted because we had to do so much so fast.